For or against a new character in 7 days ?

Unknown

Personally sick of the release rate, roster slots are way too expensive for what it's worth.
So couldnt care less for a new one.

Unknown

We already have the answer to the question.

Generally a new patch means a new character. So we'll have a new character next week...

babinro

I'm all for it.

I'd rather have too much of something rather than not enough. New characters are fun.
They keep the game interesting and exciting for me. They act as a driving force to keep me playing.

The flow of new characters does create a problem with older characters and roster slots....but these are problems that we'll face regardless of whether characters come out every 2 weeks, every month or quarterly. New characters are FUN. Lets not nerf fun and leave the other problems in the background.

These are issues that will only get worse regardless of how quickly characters are introduced. D3 needs to tackle these quickly.
1) Players need a more reasonable means of upgrading roster slots.
2) Give players access to more targeted cover rewards in order to finish characters in their roster.

brisashi

I would be far more excited to see a third ability for Ragnarok or Doom than to have to spend more HP to make room for gambit or some other character I likely won't even use outside of featured events.

Lystrata

The new characters aren't the problem, really. Well, they are - but in tandem with roster slot costs. If I could actually gain and keep this week's new character, without selling off last week's new character, then it'd be fine.

But we're saturated in new characters with no way to keep them, other than to pay for HP. This is not F2P. I will happily buy X amount of HP for each season I play, as I think it's good to support a form of entertainment I'm getting use of - but by forcing me into it, they're just driving me away.

So either slow down the rate of new characters, or make it easier/more cost-effective to actually keep them. Otherwise... what the **** is the point?


(EDIT: Of course, this doesn't even touch on the problem of vaulting characters/token pulls/etc, which only gets worse as they further drown us in characters. New characters seem to be their quick-fix solution for end-game players... rather than any actual end-game content.)

PuceMoose

Dang it, I just added breadsticks to my traditional Friday night pizza order after reading that. I'll be cursing you during that extra 15 minutes on the treadmill next week, whereisbatman!

Unknown

Starting with Season 10, I wish all new characters could be Season rewards before they were ever in an event. Not 3 seasons worth, just one. Make sure new characters are spread out by at least a month that way. New 4*s should follow the current trend of a new cover every season for 3 months. When that happens, maybe take a 3 month break on new characters.

The push is too great. I know, new characters make money in cover and token sales, and that's great, but this model is unsustainable. It's become a 6 month or more process to transition to 3* roster, and that's bad. Token pulls are too all over the place to reliably 13 cover a hero. And even if you do, what if it's Beast? (shudder). 1 new character a month is fine. 3 new characters a month is madness. Not to mention the existing vaulting problem will just get worse and worse.

In my perfect MPQ world, a new character, let's say Gambit, is the Top 250 Alliance reward for a season. MAYBE Top 100 gets 2 covers and top 25 get 3 covers, but probably not. Now Season 10 is over, a PvE runs where Gambit is handed out, and not at truncated prize rewards like Mystique (what was up with that anyway?). 1-10 get 3 covers, 11-50 get 2 covers, 51-150 get 1 cover. This event probably runs 7-9 days. Then the Gambit PvP hits season 11. The cover that was 1-10 in the PvE is now 26-100 in the PvP, and the 1100 cover is the 11-50 cover in the PvE. Gambit PvP ends, and anyone who places even for 2 cover range has a pretty decent covered gambit, with alliance rewards. Season 11 Ends, new character is up, and Gambit goes into tokens for Season 12.

IamTheDanger

I was going to vote "Love new characters and love PvE" until I saw the last option. Then I just had to hit that one .

But seriously, I really do love all the different characters. For most people, it seems the availability of roster slots is the big problem. However, I'm an addict with OCD, so it might not be a good idea to listen to anything I have to say.

Unknown

I can swing the Hp cost of a new roster slot. I am way iso starved though and have far too many people to level up already without adding more to the list. That being said I do like the new chars but the general consensus does seem to be slow down a little.

Wonko33

keep 'hem coming, I love having 15 guys with 2 covers each in my roster

Unknown

stephen43084 wrote:

If mpq is serious about roster diversity, it doesn't make sense to make the HP cost prohibitive.

This.

I have money for roster slots, but with how slow ISo is, there is no point in spending it.

SnowcaTT

Pretty overwhelmingly against there. I voted against for costs early on, it's currently 8 "meh", 15 "yes" and nearly 80 "no".

Increase HP drops, iso drops, decrease HP cost for roster slots, increase cover drops - all those things will keep the ability to increase your character levels and roster at the same rate as historically possible. Without increases in these, it becomes underwhelming, under-leveled characters that you wonder if you can make roster space for.

Without them, I vote no on new characters - so many and so quickly released. Can't possibly afford their space/covers/iso, their covers and events are getting increasingly spread apart with each release, so what is the point? I see the whales covering and leveling their 4*'s, so who is paying money for HP/ISO to level the tons of mediocre 3*'s that have been presented?

Unknown

Most likely they're releasing new characters at this pace is to allow their new story lines to unfold. At Comic-Con, they dropped the Dark Reign tag and we got the impression the Devs are moving towards more original content (pvp is stale and old, we keep rehashing pve events...boring...give us something new!). So they're trying to give folks what they want.

You don't have to have a maxed roster or fully covered character to enjoy the game. The roster slot costs are worrisome, but it's OK to let a character go.

My biggest concern is that the field is overpopulated at the 3* level. Why not create a 3* -> 4* transition by releasing these new characters as 4*'s? We definitely have enough characters to balance the load among the different tiers.

Unknown

I think D3 should bring out a new character in 7 days. His name will be "ISO-man" and his abilities will cost 10 AP each and each be "if you win this battle, gain an additional 1000 ISO8".

Unknown

gorgehound wrote:

Most likely they're releasing new characters at this pace is to allow their new story lines to unfold. At Comic-Con, they dropped the Dark Reign tag and we got the impression the Devs are moving towards more original content (pvp is stale and old, we keep rehashing pve events...boring...give us something new!). So they're trying to give folks what they want.

You don't have to have a maxed roster or fully covered character to enjoy the game. The roster slot costs are worrisome, but it's OK to let a character go.

My biggest concern is that the field is overpopulated at the 3* level. Why not create a 3* -> 4* transition by releasing these new characters as 4*'s? We definitely have enough characters to balance the load among the different tiers.

Except, they haven't had a new story since Deadpool, and it seems "story" is secondary to "HP sales".

Unknown

More is fine but let's increase some of the drops I have never gotten a miss marvel drop , seemed like torch dropped all the time.

Unknown

Budget Player Cadet wrote:

I think D3 should bring out a new character in 7 days. His name will be "ISO-man" and his abilities will cost 10 AP each and each be "if you win this battle, gain an additional 1000 ISO8".

A new character every week would be awesome if the first covers were not a nightmare were not horrible to get (PvE) and if the price to max them was reasonable. Now, $200 worth of Iso and covers is just insane, especially when it is Beast.

Make it $8-10 each at max (the more you play, the less it costs) Iso and covers included.

evil panda

I'm all for new characters, but it would be great if they do away with making them required for PvE nodes (or by giving us rental characters like in PvP). I enjoy seeing new characters and figuring out how their powers should be played, and if there was no significant penalty, I just wouldn't own the characters I wasnt interested in

Unknown

Nellyson wrote:

They need to stop with the new characters and give us more story...

I don't mind the new characters, but I agree that more storyline would be my biggest wish. Perhaps 3-4 solid PVE storylines based around Mystique, Blade, Thor, and Doc Ock -- would be sweet. That and more Gauntlet, less heroics.

Unknown

Not a really good option for me. It's neither yes nor no.

I love getting new characters. However, I don't want to have to grind for days to get them, especially if it's a boring heroic PvE. I'm fine with an enjoyable one, like Deadpool, or if it has to be a heroic, at least make the useful covers more easily available or give us a larger roster variety.